I think I understood. I just made a reasonable inference. if that's not a reasonable enough for you, excuse me.

Click to expand...

All those speed evaluation do have their own methodology.
I will give a pointer for a good reference to see how is done in Austria
Please seehttp://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=6537769
post #198
Please see one of links inside of this post
Please see the introduction part of THOSE LINKS

The study investigated differences in the one- (SH) and two-handed (DH) backhands when hit flat, across-court (AC) and down-the-line (DL), and with heavy topspin DL (TDL). The ability to disguise each of these backhands when hitting the above strokes was also assessed. Eighteen college-level male tennis players, identified as having a high performance topspin SH (n = 6) or DH (n = 12) backhand drive, participated in the study. Players were required to hit three AC, DL and TDL backhands from the baseline with their preferred technique, while being filmed with two high-speed video cameras operating at 200 Hz. The highest horizontal velocity backhand for each stroke was analysed. Results indicated that the sequential coordination of five body segments (hips, shoulder, upper arm, forearm, and hand/racquet rotations) was required for the execution of the SH stroke. The same number of segments were generally coordinated in the DH stroke (hips, shoulders, and varying degrees of upper arm and forearm rotations followed by hand/racquet movement).

Mature players produced comparable racquet horizontal velocities 0.005 s prior to impact using either the SH or DH backhand technique.

The SH backhand was characterised by a more rotated shoulder alignment than the DH stroke (SH: 119.1 degrees; DH: 83.4 degrees) at the completion of the backswing. At impact the ball was impacted further in front (SH: 0.59 m: DH: 0.40 m) and a similar distance to the side of the body (SH: 0.75 m: DH: 0.70 m). Players using the DH backhand technique delayed the horizontal acceleration of the racquet towards the ball (SH: 0.13 s: DH: 0.08 s prior to impact) and thus were capable of displaying a similar hitting motion closer to impact than players with a SH technique.

Click to expand...

So this data says that a 1hbh and a 2hbh produce the same racquet speed 0.005 s before impact. OK. Good data point.

Hi,
please specify which parts are bad from your point of view
My angle is as follows:
1."Power" of 1hbh vs 2hbh looks comparable according to the paper I quote for a specific group of college
students selected for this paper
2.I teach some combos of 2hbh with 1hbh.
Meaning majority of shots are hit with 2hbh
"Combos" do depend on a court location.
I teach 1hbh slice and volleys
I teach 1hbh for transition game
3.I am NOT sure about the quote from the original link
"Two handed backhand:
1. more stable racket at the moment of impact"
I am NOT even sure that I know what is the defintion of stable for this case.

mostly his assertions are based on his beliefs and his interpretation. his reasons lack rigor. some maybe true but his set of beliefs doesn't make something superior. maybe just in his mind. title should read why he believes..

What an incredible discussion. It would be as simple as letting the kids hit a few doublehanders and a few onehanders to see which fits best.

Saying the doublehander is best for everyone is false. I know a lot of players who have a very natural onehander. Just look at the pros. Would Guga, Gaudio, Becker, Edberg have been as good with doublehanders? I don't think so.

OTOH, a good doublehander is a joy to watch. Rios, Nalbandian, Djokovic and Agassi are models for that.

I do think coaches are lazy sometimes in wanting to teach exactly the same game style to everyone, i.e. looping topspin balls. I for one was taught that game when I was young, only to find in my mid twenties that mixing it up with flat shots can be way more effective.

Hi,
please specify which parts are bad from your point of view
My angle is as follows:
1."Power" of 1hbh vs 2hbh looks comparable according to the paper I quote for a specific group of college
students selected for this paper
2.I teach some combos of 2hbh with 1hbh.
Meaning majority of shots are hit with 2hbh
"Combos" do depend on a court location.
I teach 1hbh slice and volleys
I teach 1hbh for transition game
3.I am NOT sure about the quote from the original link
"Two handed backhand:
1. more stable racket at the moment of impact"
I am NOT even sure that I know what is the defintion of stable for this case.

Click to expand...

"they always state disadvantages and advantages of one and the other or their subjective feeling toward one or the other backhand"
>>he is doing exact thing he is blaming others for.

"If we agree on definition of better(more efficient for tennis competition ) it is not hard to see which one is better by comparing its advantages and disadvantages"
>>I guess he's never seen top pros using 1hbh.

"More reliable – means which one will perform better in crounch situations.By common sense is known that in tight situations players have to use bigger body parts to lessen the impact of musles tightening.This is again in favor of two handed backhand"
>>not very 'common' and not really make 'sense'.

"More consistent- it means with which one you can hit more or less the same shot over and over again.It is obvious;two handed backhand because two hands on the handle enable more controlled backswing and more stable position of racket at impact"
>>nothing's obvious. 2 hands thus more controlled backswing thus more consistent? is this a joke?

"More precise- again two handed backhand because of the things just mentioned, and also because the margin for error for one handed bachand is higher due to more precise positioning in relation to the ball"
>>again completely baseless

"More versatile- two hander is much more versatile than one hander.With two hander you can hit drive,different topspins,topspin lob,short topspin cross,half-volley,balls on the rise,high balls with topspin or on the rise,and all these different shots are much more easier to execute on one hand (much higher percentage of success), and with more variation on the other hand than using one handed backhand .Furthermore , players who use two handed backhand easyly transfer this technique to hit drive and topspin (very difficult shots hit with one hand)volleys ."
>>again completely baseless. he should count how many different kinds of backhand djokovic or murray hit in a match. he's living in a 2hbh fantasy land.

"Better diguise- again there is no comparison between the two.Two hander is far out because of the other hand which will help to overcome different ponts of contact what is not case with one handed backhand.This luxury to commit a bit later is the main point in disguising a shot (keeping the intentions to you till is too late for opponent to react)"
>>another hand so variable contact points? can't believe he's coaching tennis. feel sorry for his students. really.

"More power- power at one handed backhand comes mostly by stepping into the ball;rotation of the body, and backswing are second in line .When htiting two handed backhand power can come also from stepping into the ball (lateral force),but as well as rotating upper body around head (angular force), and to lessen degree from the backswing..So it obvious that two hander has edge over one hander."
>>if this reasoning and understanding of biomechanics makes this obvious to him, it's quite obvious that he should study more not write a statement of superiority.

"Return of serve- it is almost impossible to return fast flat serves on fast surface using one handed backhand drive,topspin because by using one hander you cannot adjust your backswing length and by not adjusting it you are late, and when you are late there is no way to hit one handed backhand (there is not second hand to come around on the ball).Also because of less difficult stroke mechanics player who uses two hander can
quicker prepare which is of paramount importance for return of serve"
>>he should watch more pro tennis. top pros using 1hbh regularly do this albeit with less authority at times than 2hbh.

Hope this is enough. The rest is just as worthless analyses as above. The author prides himself as being a persistent guy I read somewhere else and he should have used that talent in how to think more clearly in college. Good grief!

Borami - I'm with you on this - I read the piece and came to pretty much the same conclusion, it is not a scientific analysis, nor is it an objective study, it is merely one person's opinions wrapped up as "fact".

You could pretty much re-write the piece swapping 1 hander and 2 hander around and it would read much the same and still make sense!

For example...
"More versatile- one hander is much more versatile than two hander. With one hander you can hit drive,different topspins,topspin lob,short topspin cross,half-volley,balls on the rise,high balls with topspin or on the rise,and all these different shots are much more easier to execute on one hand (much higher percentage of success), and with more variation .Furthermore , players who use one handed backhand easyly transfer this technique to hit slice and volleys (very difficult shots hit with two hand)"

Borami - I'm with you on this - I read the piece and came to pretty much the same conclusion, it is not a scientific analysis, nor is it an objective study, it is merely one person's opinions wrapped up as "fact".

You could pretty much re-write the piece swapping 1 hander and 2 hander around and it would read much the same and still make sense!

For example...
"More versatile- one hander is much more versatile than two hander. With one hander you can hit drive,different topspins,topspin lob,short topspin cross,half-volley,balls on the rise,high balls with topspin or on the rise,and all these different shots are much more easier to execute on one hand (much higher percentage of success), and with more variation .Furthermore , players who use one handed backhand easyly transfer this technique to hit slice and volleys (very difficult shots hit with two hand)"

And you can't dispute that, as those are "facts"

Cheers

Click to expand...

Ash,
there are 2 issues left:
1.what is amount of side spin for 1hbh vs 2hbh?
2.is it possible for incorporate elements of ATP forehand
into 2bh?
If yes what are possible implications?
If have tried to "touch" item #2 somewhere above
regards,
Julian

hi all, i have a one hander and had one for 20 years. i love the feeling of hitting a great one hander vs a 2 hander, however, and this is just my opinion, but the game has changed. in the early days the game was more about strategy and finesse and i think we can all agree that the one hander provided more options, better feel, and to some extent control. however, with the advent of more powerful racquets and strings that have essentially shrunken the court do to the ridiculous amounts of spin they provide, players like myself are constantly being pushed back by the tremendous amounts of spin and power of the modern game and lets face it...its easier to hit those deep heavy topspin balls with a 2 hander than one. the 2 hander not only provides more power and control, but more importantly, for me, more stability. federer is a genius and has endless amounts of shots, but i've noticed over the years that is one hander, in particular his topspin has become more of a liability for him. how often does he hit that drop shot now? how often is he being pushed back, especially by a healty nadal? he knows he can't "bang" anymore with the big boys and needs to use more variety, which he has with the one hander. however, there is only one federer and most players don't have that kind of variety. in other words, he does so many other things better than everyone else that he can still dominate, even with his one hander. i hate to say this, but the reason everyone has a 2 hander isn't a coincidence. the game has changed and the 1 hander is being phased out.

Ash,
there are 2 issues left:
1.what is amount of side spin for 1hbh vs 2hbh?

Click to expand...

The good 1HBH players I have faced do have a lot of sidespin, comparable to forehands. They all drag the racquet to the ball by the handle and whip the ball, just like forehands, which would seem to provide an explanation.

2.is it possible for incorporate elements of ATP forehand
into 2bh?
If yes what are possible implications?
If have tried to "touch" item #2 somewhere above
regards,
Julian

Click to expand...

I believe the answer is an unqualified "yes", and I have always believed this is how the pros approach it. I don't know what kind of implications you are looking for, but the main one that occurs to me is that the 2HBH has the potential to be as good as a forehand. The drawbacks, of course, are that the main muscles involved in the 2HBH belong to the weaker and less coordinated side of the body, and the stabilizing influence of the dominant hand is offset by the resulting restriction on the range and degrees of freedom of motion. Note, this is a comparison with the forehand, and not the 1HBH.

I have to laugh at this idea 1hbh can be a health hazard. if taught and performed wrong it could be but what else isn't? key is to wait until the student can faithfully follow instruction and find a coach who has very very good 1hbh.

I have to laugh at this idea 1hbh can be a health hazard. if taught and performed wrong it could be but what else isn't? key is to wait until the student can faithfully follow instruction and find a coach who has very very good 1hbh.

Click to expand...

A bit "orthogonal issue"?
If one switches what to do to with return of serve?
I had multiple cases like that and an answer is NOT a piece of cake.
Slicing a la Federer is NOT a great answer,IMO
I do NOT advice to do a switch during a middle of a high school season,etc,etc

A bit "orthogonal issue"?
>>just had to make sure. had to check dictionary. what do you mean?
If one switches what to do to with return of serve?
>>learn how to return in 1hbh. find a coach who can teach this skill.
I had multiple cases like that and an answer is NOT a piece of cake.
>>cuz you can't teach 1hbh return. not many coaches who can teach good 1hbh period.
Slicing a la Federer is NOT a great answer,IMO
>>fed will smack 1hbh return on anything less than top pros serves. but even with those slices he's won more matches than most pros ever did and ever will.
I do NOT advice to do a switch during a middle of a high school season,etc,etc
>>me neither. but one can learn and practice 1hbh while playing matches in 2hbh for some time.

Ash,
there are 2 issues left:
1.what is amount of side spin for 1hbh vs 2hbh?
2.is it possible for incorporate elements of ATP forehand
into 2bh?
If yes what are possible implications?
If have tried to "touch" item #2 somewhere above
regards,
Julian

Click to expand...

Side spin - not sure! Maybe JY has studied? My hunch would be single has greater, but the dominance of the hands in the 2 hander may effect this (top hand dominance may increase the amount of side spin???)

2. Elements yes, but I like a greater amount of extension from the top hand on my ideal 2 hander, so that probably doesn't map across exactly like the typical double bend ATP forehand. However, GRF, hip rotation, drive position etc can all be practiced as a lefty forehand and incorporated into a righties 2 hander without question.

I think the women's 2 handers are generally more like the forehand as they tend to maintain the double bend structure in both arms for the duration of the shot so for a right hander it is like a lefty forehand.

When switching or learning a 1h as a newbie, how old do you think is the appropriate time to switch for juniors without there being any health hazards?

Click to expand...

It's appropriate to switch whenever the coach feels it is appropriate. Sorry, that's a bit glib I know, but there will be a time when it naturally feels correct. For example, a player I worked with up until very recently has always hit a two hander, but has always been bottom hand dominant and we had trouble helping him feel the release of his top hand (something Soderling had to spend a lot of time learning very recently funnily enough!) I always felt that he would be a single hander and had I continued to work with him I think we would have probably changed (we always did work on his left side hitting with dominant and non-dom hands to develop his 2 hander, so it wouldn't be a massive adjustment). He was just transitioning from green to yellow ball (over here u10s play green) and I think that's probably the wrong time to make the change as being 10 and having to play u12's can be a big physical difference. Had he played single through red, orange and green it would be different.

As it is, he is with his new coach and still doing very, very well with a 2 hander so it is a moot point really. But one I will probably always wonder about

The answer is multilevel: only superior coaches know how to teach a good 1HB. It's easier to learn a 2HB at a young age. It takes longer to develop a 1HB; ergo, results will come later and many know-nothing parents don't want to wait.

The vast majority of tennis coaches don't know what to f... they're doing as it is and you expect them to teach a sophisticated shot like a 1HB? Come on! Why not a heavy American twist on the ad side while you're at it. What's the percentage of coaches who could teach that one?

Side spin - not sure! Maybe JY has studied? My hunch would be single has greater, but the dominance of the hands in the 2 hander may effect this (top hand dominance may increase the amount of side spin???)

2. Elements yes, but I like a greater amount of extension from the top hand on my ideal 2 hander, so that probably doesn't map across exactly like the typical double bend ATP forehand. However, GRF, hip rotation, drive position etc can all be practiced as a lefty forehand and incorporated into a righties 2 hander without question.

I think the women's 2 handers are generally more like the forehand as they tend to maintain the double bend structure in both arms for the duration of the shot so for a right hander it is like a lefty forehand.

Click to expand...

Ash,

per #2 above for your ideal 2 hander

Is a face of a racket tilted/closed slightly at a contact?
If yes how much (ballpark)?

See for example blog #7 Page 13 of blog.tennisspeed.com
(the picture is drawn for a orehand but the question remains valid)

The title of the blog is
"A Roadmap to a Hall-of-Fame Forehand - Part 7: FHT-3 - The Past Lives On (But Only Barely) "
regards,
Julian

nice study but mostly easily predictable findings I think. one question. "delayed the horizontal acceleration of the racquet towards the ball" could you explain?

Click to expand...

I do NOT have the full text of the paper.
The interpretation below is based PARTIALLY on a book by Knudson.

There are two points here-
one trivial and one more complex/implicit

The first one:
The peak of the horizontal acceleration of the racquet towards the ball is observed to be for the double hander 0.08 s prior to impact.

The second one
ssc for forearm/hand/shoulder is PROBABLY between 20-40 miliseconds before the contact or at LEAST it would be optimal to have it this way.

It would be the "best" to have all three (the peak of horizontal acceleration,contact point and ssc) as closed as possible to each other timewise.
In the case of onehander they will be a bit more APART because the peak of acceleration is EARLIER
so the peak of acceleration for double hander is "delayed" in this sense

PS #1
The important part is that a racket does NOT accelerate through the contact.
It was a bone of contention with Oscar in one of famous/deleted/to remain unnamed threads (in
the case of forehand,to be specific).
Regards,
Julian

some great footage to review this wrist and arm movement is right in our pro strokes library. take a look at federer's backhand from the stationary back view frame by frame as well as haas, robredo and others. the wrist and forearm will pronate as one reaches the bottom of the downswing (some pronate sooner than others on the one hander), and then supination occurs as one begins the forward movement towards impact with an extended arm, and finally you will see federer many times as well as others like philoppoussis, kuerten etc. end with their wrist in a slight radial deviated position when hitting heavier topspin.
----->http://www.virtualtennisacademy.com...adid=494&PHPSESSID=v0nc5k928iv5558fufne4h1pi3

I'm coaching two sisters now aged 9 and 11. Been working with them for about a year now.

Teaching the nine year old a two hander, I started the 11 year old with a two-hander, but switched her over to a one-hander and its just more natural to her.

I'm a one-hander myself, so it will be easy for me to teach her. Almost got teary eyed last week when I was running her side to side on up-the-line drills. Her 1HBH follow through and knee bend on the run... is just outrageous.

I taught myself a one-hander, and I must have that spine imbalance because whenever I try to hit a two-hander, I can't seem to get forward momentum, everything is just leaning back when I hit it. lol

If we look at empirical evidence, is the one-handed backhand really worse?

5 of the current top 20 in the world have them (Federer, Gasquet, Almagro, Warwinka, Kohlschreiber; 6 if you make it the top 21 and include Haas); they are successful on a variety of surfaces and with different overall styles of play. I don't know if 25% of the players in their generation(s) were trained on that stroke.

Anyway, I'm just glad that people are even discussing the one-hander and hopefully there will be a better understanding of the stroke and how to use and teach it properly. We can use all the resources we can get!

If we look at empirical evidence, is the one-handed backhand really worse?

5 of the current top 20 in the world have them (Federer, Gasquet, Almagro, Warwinka, Kohlschreiber; 6 if you make it the top 21 and include Haas); they are successful on a variety of surfaces and with different overall styles of play. I don't know if 25% of the players in their generation(s) were trained on that stroke.

Anyway, I'm just glad that people are even discussing the one-hander and hopefully there will be a better understanding of the stroke and how to use and teach it properly. We can use all the resources we can get!

Click to expand...

The funny thing about this is that many Europeans seem to privilege the one handed backhand when they are much likelier than their American counterparts to play on red clay where bounces are peculiarly high and, rallies, likely to last.

I would like to find a single convincing argument, based upon facts, which does support the view that two handed backhands really outperform their single handed equivalent... So far, I have seen none, although I did buy into it myself over some period of time.

Now, the smoke screen has vanished and it seems like it's also an other belief which has no empirical relevance.

Problem here....\
It IS arguable.
And 1hbh is easy to cheat to a slice.
And grip change needs to be more accurate.
And body posture needs to be the same every time, as late changes are hard to compensate.
I use a 1hbh exclusively for the last 20 years.
My competitive days I used only a 2hbh for topspin, a 1hbh for defensive slices.

The one-handed topspin backhand is a simple shot to learn if it is taught right. I think it is a simpler stroke than the forehand or two handed backhand. I just have to laugh when people say you need more strength to hit a one hander. These people probably were never taught the right way to hit the shot. Most people I see that are having problems with their one-handed backhand are having severe issues with their technique.

If you see little kids that are taught right, they can rip the one-hander. You will also see 200 lb men with inferior technique trying to hit technically unsound one-handers. It's a technique issue for most people.

Problem here....\
It IS arguable.
And 1hbh is easy to cheat to a slice.
And grip change needs to be more accurate.
And body posture needs to be the same every time, as late changes are hard to compensate.
I use a 1hbh exclusively for the last 20 years.
My competitive days I used only a 2hbh for topspin, a 1hbh for defensive slices.

Click to expand...

that's the point... the posture.... requires time to get there..

you can hit open stance, but not ideal.

and sure, technique is more important than 2hbh with which you can hit half ass.....

honestly i have not found 1 clip in the public domain that really address the issues 1hb players face - open stance, high balls being 2 of them.... every guru shows a couple of shots at waist high

I agree with you, luv40.
I use a 1hbh sidespin mainly, slice for defense, topspin for passes.
My 2hbh, which hasn't been used since 1979, can hit more hard groundies right off the bat.
I'm just too lazy to hit it.
I've never seen a rec player with a 1hbh that looks and performs like his forehand. I've seen hundreds of 2hbh's that look and perform like their forehands.

honestly i have not found 1 clip in the public domain that really address the issues 1hb players face - open stance, high balls being 2 of them.... every guru shows a couple of shots at waist high

Click to expand...

Very very good point and one that I have raised several times on this forum. 1 handed BH videos on the Internet do not address the high ball and the jamming ball issue, and show only sunny-day scenario balls being hit.

Very very good point and one that I have raised several times on this forum. 1 handed BH videos on the Internet do not address the high ball and the jamming ball issue, and show only sunny-day scenario balls being hit.

Click to expand...

Try hitting a 1HBH with something other than a continental grip, and you will not find it so difficult. FYI, high balls are no walk in the park even with a strong 2 hander.